From Gamasutra Interview
That stage of the company’s history was very dynamic and interesting because there was a big debate inside the company about whether we go to video game platforms or not.
The ‘Video game platforms’ was actually the NES. The debate was between President and founder Trip Hawkins, who refused to go NES because of the belief the NES would crash like Atari, and the EA investors. Trip Hawkins even took off his shoe during a meeting and hammered it on the table. Trip Hawkins relented and decided to do consoles but mostly because the investors were threatening to fire him.
At that time, it was still kind of Amiga and PC and disk-based stuff, and there was a group inside the company — Larry Probst was probably the main proponent — who wanted us to get into the video game business, looking at what happened with Nintendo 8-bit.
We TOTALLY missed the NES rocket… kinda just like how we totally missed the Wii rocket. Boy, were those investors pissed! But since we missed the NES rocket, we looked to the next upcoming rocket. We were pissed at Nintendo because of how they rocketed before us (to this day, we still won’t put our NES games like Archon or M.U.L.E. on the Virtual Console), so we looked and hoped for Sega. To get leverage, we at EA proudly reverse engineered the Genesis and declared to Sega that we would get favorable licensing or we would publish the games on our own. Sega complied. This is why EA was able to put out more games on Genesis than the other third parties. Boy, those were the days!
Before that, we’d always been successful, and we had a very rock star image with all the “Can a computer make you cry?” in the early formative years of the business — the album cover years. It was kind of very cool but very niche. It wasn’t operating on a global basis, it wasn’t operating on a scale.
This actually applies to the present with our ‘Core’, but Mr. Malstrom is stating it in the translation because I am a doofus and haven’t figured that out yet.
And, you know, we entered the next generation of the Xbox 360, the PS3, and then the Wii, and that’s been a more difficult platform transition for us than the prior three. A lot of it had to do with the fact that the Wii kind of came out of nowhere. You know, we weren’t alone in the industry not really seeing that one coming.
It was like the NES all over again!!! But this time it is different! We are not alone. There were other companies blindsided by the Wii! So it isn’t exactly like the NES, is it?
Kind of when we said, “Alright, we’re moving off of that business. We’re gonna give the license back. We don’t want to be in this business anymore. You guys get to go create an IP. Let’s see what you can do.”
The quality just blew people away. I never thought that that team at Redwood Shores was that talented. One of the coolest things in our culture is that we were able to uncork that passion for product again by just turning teams loose. In some cases it worked, and in some cases, you know, we had some issues.
Wow! Who knew our developers actually had talent when they weren’t forced to regurgitate the same sequels or license games over and over and over again!
With the Nintendo Wii, Nintendo’s constantly saying third parties are successful. Yet, obviously, there are some titles that struggle even though they’re good games, so I don’t necessarily think it’s a quality issue with core-focused games. What isn’t clicking, do you think?
FG: I think part of the problem with some of the games is they’ve been approached as ports, and didn’t really have the right design from the control route approach…
Holy smokes, I said something right on. Even Malstrom is surprised!
But that’s changed quite a bit, though, at least with EA. And there are other companies.
FG: Well, there has been some M-rated high-quality games released recently on Wii that we’ve taken note of, and that’s why I think Dead Space: Extraction is a gamble. It’s a calculated risk. Can a high-quality experience like that that appeals to a more mature audience work on the Wii platform?
Unfortunately, while I was right in saying that ports do not succeed on the Wii, I still haven’t figured out that spin-offs don’t work either. That is OK, though! We are quite happy to blow up millions of dollars just learn a lesson that could have been spent by five minutes listening to Wii core gamers of what not to do!
We spent a lot of research, time, and understanding that the customer dynamics of who’s actually playing on the Wii, do they own multiple platforms, are there really gamers on the Wii, or is it mainly families and youth? But we think we’ve found a market on the Wii that would be interested in the Dead Space: Extraction experiment. We’re going to take a gamble and build that market.
You know, until you try, you don’t really know if the hypothesis is correct or not. When you look at things like [EA Sports] Active, how the sports brand is doing, [or] Sims, in our lineup, we’ve got Spore, Need for Speed, Dead Space: Extraction, and the Beatles all shipping before Christmas, and they’re all unique designs for the Wii.
We’ve spent all this research and money, and we still don’t have a clue! Woe is us!
They might have been in a universe or in an IP that’s been someplace else, but we designed them very uniquely for the Wii. So, we actually think we can grow our share there.
And I think a lot of it had to do with, how do you speak to those customers and how do you identify them? The market is so gigantic now. It’s the leading platform in terms of install base. There’s fish there to fish for, but you have to communicate them differently than you do on the consoles, the PS3 and the 360.
We have no clue about the customers on the Wii. But since it is the leading platform, we think we can make tons of money… somehow. We think making core customers on Wii are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than core customers for PS3 and 360. I don’t know why this is. I won’t or can’t articulate why. But I FEEL it!
I do think, though, that it is a difficult ecosystem when only Nintendo products can succeed. Eventually, those types of platforms lose legs, because you need innovation coming from publishers and developers outside of Nintendo to really keep them fresh. I mean, look at 360 as an example, they’ve really nailed it.
I am such a doofus that I think games, on the same platform, compete against one another! Apparently, one customer is incapable of buying more than one game! I also forget about the DS where non-Nintendo games thrive. But it makes me feel better saying only Nintendo games can succeed on its platform because the alternative would be saying that our games lack quality.
Gamecube owners have been wondering why there was no Burnout 3 or other Burnout games. Fools! We love Microsoft’s moneyhat! Instead of getting cool core games you want, you get spin-off games. Instead of a Burnout, you get Need for Speed! Yeah! Take that, you non-Next-Gen players!
And I think Nintendo knows that,
And I like to put words in Nintendo’s mouth! Don’t I rock?
…and that’s why they’ve been very supportive with our company and others in trying to bring more titles. They’ve been very good with partnering with us, sharing information and giving us a view of the markets.
I will make believe Nintendo is supportive because they feel GUILTY that they hog the market. Yes, guilt! At least, that is what I want to believe.
——
Folks, this guy has been around during the NES days, and he can’t connect the dots! It shouldn’t be that surprising since he couldn’t connect the dots twenty years ago either.
Making core games for Wii (as opposed to expanded audience games) really isn’t that complicated. It is essentially making a Gamecube Plus game. The Wii core titles are, in effect, sequels to best selling Gamecube games: Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, Pikmin 3, Super Smash Brothers Brawl, Resident Evil 4 +, and so on.
Spin-offs didn’t sell on the Gamecube. Gamecube players don’t want an inferior version of an IP. Core gamers and Expanded Audience gamers on the Wii share one thing in common: they are tired of being treated like second class gamers. Putting a spin-off of a main series onto the Wii is basically telling them that they are second class gamers. Even if it is good, they won’t buy it, because they feel inferior playing it knowing that the real version is on another platform.
If you want to succeed on the Wii, stop treating Wii customers as if they are second bananas. Spin-offs of a main series won’t work. Ask any Wii owner or the entire Gamecube software sales history.
Malstrom's Articles News 